Originally Posted by DuckieHo
So why even interject, "I still would go with HDDs"? That misses the point of SSDs in the first place.
It's actually even lower since you have to account for 8b/10b encoding:
24 * 6 Gbps => 144 Gbps * 8/10 encoding => 115.2Gbps => 14,745.6 MB/s.
Add in some overhead and it's more like 13,000MB/s.
(You are right though that the chart is mislabled!)
Note that I did mention that I wasn't counting that: "not even deducting the losses due to encoding"
I chose to omit it because the numbers were going to be so different that it didn't matter and their omission could only serve to skew the number away from the point I was making. Since the number would still firmly establish my point, it would do nothing but highlight that even when being generous with the numbers, my point would still be correct.